I test drove one and loved the performance and handling, to the extent they can be evaluated in a short test drive. Visibility is bad but I could probably learn to live with it. Interior storage was absurd and I cannot imagine WTF the designers were thinking not including space for a smartphone.

What really peeved me was how LOUD the LT1 is. Yes it's fun to hear the engine at 95 dB for the first drive and probably the tenth. Day in and day out? No thanks. The Mustang is much better balanced, quieter yet loud enough to enjoy the engine's song.

I also test drove an ATS coupe based on the same Alpha platform. Somehow they managed a large trunk opening and ample interior storage, and the rear seats were more spacious, all while having a shorter wheelbase and narrower body. Visibility was also much improved. Even better, unlike the juvenile looking Camaro, the ATS looks sleek and modern. Unfortunately the ATS-V is overpriced and doesn't come with a V8.

Thus GM squandered the opportunity presented by Alpha, the greatest compact class chassis in the automotive world under $100K.

Not sure what all the complaining is about. This car dominated on the Lightning Lap. I believe it was the fastest ever for any car under $35,000

yep the problem is that you cant relax on the road due to horrible visibility. Dominating at the lightning lap is great but Id rather it be very good and have the visibility and be 8k cheaper like the mustang GT. And I have WANTED an alpha platform sports car for 5 years.... I guess its never going to happen before V8's are banished from the market by CAFE and electric motors rule.

The complaining is because this car should be able to be a DD. But it really sucks at that aspect. Not many people in everyday life are willing to trade a fast lightning lap for a trunk that can't fit a spare and has terrible visibility.

Edit: it also looks like crap. keep making this "retro" design look more and more strange and whacky. Redesign the thing, get rid of the pointless creases.

yep the problem is that you cant relax on the road due to horrible visibility. Dominating at the lightning lap is great but Id rather it be very good and have the visibility and be 8k cheaper like the mustang GT. And I have WANTED an alpha platform sports car for 5 years.... I guess its never going to happen before V8's are banished from the market by CAFE and electric motors rule.

While obviously not a V8, I have a 2016 ATS-V, which shares the alpha platform, and it is easily the best handling car I have ever had. Incredible, precise steering, and the suspension is dynamite. Only gripe is the lack of interior features/quality. I feel your pain with not being able to deal with the Camaro.

I so wanted to like this car, but could never get past judging the book by its cover, despite the awesome chassis, motor and 6 speed. In 1LE form, it is fantastic, but I could never accept the styling. Hence I have a Mustang GT PP Level 2 on order to be delivered in April.

Call me when you do a retro inspired by the Gen2 Camaro, Chevy. Until then, I’m a Ford guy.

Unfortunately, Buick won't do the Avista. The Mustang "retro" works - the Camaro never captured the essence of the 1st gen.

I believe the Mustang works because it's hardly retro at all. There's as much modern BMW in the Mustang as there is classic Mustang. It's just dead gorgeous. I wish I could drop a Mustang body onto an Alpha chassis.

I’m not into domestics at all but the Camaro and Mustang platforms have come so far from a performance perspective. Even at $50k it’s an un-deniable value...

That 3.9 0-60 is impressive but for me that 4.2 5-60 is phenomial. There are all sorts of Turbo’d Audis and Bmws putting down that kind of 0-60 but they get destroyed on a rolling start and lose a second where the SS only loses 0.3. That is great!

I’m not into domestics at all but the Camaro and Mustang platforms have come so far from a performance perspective. Even at $50k it’s an un-deniable value... That 3.9 0-60 is impressive but for me that 4.2 5-60 is phenomial. There are all sorts of Turbo’d Audis and Bmws putting down that kind of 0-60 but they get destroyed on a rolling start and lose a second where the SS only loses 0.3. That is great!

I like the 5-60mph stat, but the 10-60 or 15-60 will not be off on those cars as the boost will come on much faster. In a 4 cyl turbo that is another story, huge dropoff vs a V6 or small V8 turbo.

That's because the 5-60 is more representative of a car's performance, as are the midrange speed "passing" acceleration times. Standing on the brake pedal and revving the engine may get a good 0-60 time but it's not representative of commuting, spirited back road driving, or track competition, and it will ensure powertrain issues down the road.

Not sure I am following... "taking back"? They give the us a new transmission option that has apparently improved efficiency (gonna hold final judgement until I see C/D's "real world" test at a sustained 75 mph). I see that as a net add. No subtractions came with it.

Not sure I am following... "taking back"? They give the us a new transmission option that has apparently improved efficiency (gonna hold final judgement until I see C/D's "real world" test at a sustained 75 mph). I see that as a net add. No subtractions came with it.

Simply referring to the transmission improvements and such but the livability issues still remain unfortunately.

Not sure I am following... "taking back"? They give the us a new transmission option that has apparently improved efficiency (gonna hold final judgement until I see C/D's "real world" test at a sustained 75 mph). I see that as a net add. No subtractions came with it.

The front end looked great on the '16 - '18 models. They took it away and put an ugly truck front end on their sophisticated sports car chassis, because that totally makes sense.

Of course! This comes from the same company that wants to name their vehicles according to their individual torque output....??

Heh, I think the torque naming scheme will make perfect sense once Cadillac EVs begin to drop. Electric motor torque is overwhelming and addictive, and makes an EV feel quicker than the horsepower rating suggests. Thus when they have a mix of ICE and electric powertrains, the EVs will reign supreme on both the torque-based naming scheme and in the driver's perception of power.

These cars have gone the wrong way. They're not supposed to be world class sports cars. You don't buy them to run fast laps, you buy them to be cheap burnout cars that are fun. These shouldn't be nearly $50 grand.

These cars have gone the wrong way. They're not supposed to be world class sports cars. You don't buy them to run fast laps, you buy them to be cheap burnout cars that are fun. These shouldn't be nearly $50 grand.

Not everyone wants that so so handling muscle car. And Im talking about handling on real roads with imperfections. Muscle cars have always been hairy on real roads. These cars now compete on a much bigger stage with much more expensive cars. Yeah its the end of an era, but there is still the challenger, the only real muscle car left, and its a GREAT value in comparison.

Not everyone wants that so so handling muscle car. And Im talking about handling on real roads with imperfections. Muscle cars have always been hairy on real roads. These cars now compete on a much bigger stage with much more expensive cars. Yeah its the end of an era, but there is still the challenger, the only real muscle car left, and its a GREAT value in comparison.

I don't think that buyers of this kind of car care about that though. People worried about that will buy a Corvette, or M3, or something like that.

I guess my point is, all cars dont need to be the same. Sometimes, selling a different product from everyone else is a good thing, and Dodge is the only one that gets that, and they're dominating this segment, despite offering the oldest car.

They don't have to be. Both models come in $30k versions that are the fastest cars available at that price. You can do all kinds of RWD drifts and big smokey burnouts for regular car money.

But.... If you want more, they'll sell you more. Lots more.

30k should get you a very well optioned v8 car. Really with a suspension and brake upgrade. The issue is they make a giant leap to electronic everything and overkill brakes by Brembo. The automakers need to work on their value props for more modest upgrades. Some people want an upgraded suspension and brakes, but not a 5k package that throws brakes that would be more comfortable on an IMSA race car. They just did this (and this car) better in the 90s and 00s.

30k should get you a very well optioned v8 car. Really with a suspension and brake upgrade. The issue is they make a giant leap to electronic everything and overkill brakes by Brembo. The automakers need to work on their value props for more modest upgrades. Some people want an upgraded suspension and brakes, but not a 5k package that throws brakes that would be more comfortable on an IMSA race car. They just did this (and this car) better in the 90s and 00s.

Na man... This is 2019. The typical $30k vehicle is a small CUV or mid-size sedan; four cylinder.

Or, you can get Camaro / Mustang with 275 - 320hp turbo, six speed manual and a very well developed RWD chassis. For $30k, that's a performance bargain you can't get anywhere else.

To that end these two have held up the bargain. As then, as is now; you can get something fast and fun for regular car money. Pony car formula still works.

I don't want a powerful car that can't handle, that's boring. I want something fun to drive on twisty back roads, and the Camaro delivers, though it's actually overpowered for the task (driving a fast car slow).

The issue is that it isn't a good daily driver, and is instead a toy. There's not much of a market for toy vehicles, and GM already has the Corvette for that market, so it's bizzare that nobody at GM in a position of power questioned the design and packaging.

30k should get you a very well optioned v8 car. Really with a suspension and brake upgrade. The issue is they make a giant leap to electronic everything and overkill brakes by Brembo. The automakers need to work on their value props for more modest upgrades. Some people want an upgraded suspension and brakes, but not a 5k package that throws brakes that would be more comfortable on an IMSA race car. They just did this (and this car) better in the 90s and 00s.

Yeah because everyone wants cheap brakes on a 450hp sports car.

If you want a well-optioned V8 sports car for $30K then buy used. Most Camaros aren't driven much so you can find all sorts of low mileage specimens on the market. These days, new cars are for rich people. Used cars are for smart buyers.

The most recent iteration of Camaro is better to my eyes than either of the last two attempts, but there's still no getting past its boy-rocker-wannabe look. Worse, the interior packaging is not only compromised by the shapes necessitated by that overwrought, steroid-fueled exterior design; and it's just made of cheap stuff. You definitely gotta' compromise to have one.

On the upside, its seriously fast for the money, sounds great when flogged, and handles admirably well for something so large. A shame you can't see out of the thing any better, because the desire to really press Camaro is tempered by a constant concern that you can't see what's around you.

Chevy would be well served to keep the Alpha platform and basic underpinnings but aim for a more modern, less weighty design next time around.

The interior materials are fine. Interior design isn't bad, really. The low air vents are dumb but the instrument cluster is among the best on the market with two big and clear analog gauges and a highly useful digital screen between them. The infotainment is also very awesome, easy and intuitive and it has Carplay and Android Auto.

It's the interior packaging that's a dismal failure. There's no practical storage space in the cabin and the trunk opening is too small. There's a LOT of dead space between the sheetmetal and interior panels which is a shame because with better packaging the Camaro could have trounced the Mustang again in sales.

It really is a shame that neither Ford or Chevy see fit to offer these to platforms in four door form. Check failed with the SS because it looked to much like the fwd Impala and cost too much to be competitive. It seems with both automakers basically getting out of the mainstream car biz that they would find an expanded market for the excellent platforms both now have on offer. Do this yesterday... Ford offer 4 door Mustang with new sheet metal and call it Cougar or whatever. Just make it look as good as the Charger with room for 4 adults. Chevy bring back the Chevelle. Hire a decent designer for the interior. Give it a real backseat. The main thing is keep them affordable. It would be nice to see both makers invest in actual interior design on the base models devoid of all of the cheap computer junk automakers keep pushing on the buying public. Give us real knobs switches and gauges. I know this is wishful thinking because it makes too much sense. Just my thoughts.

It really is a shame that neither Ford or Chevy see fit to offer these to platforms in four door form. Check failed with the SS because it looked to much like the fwd Impala and cost too much to be competitive. It seems with both automakers basically getting out of the mainstream car biz that they would find an expanded market for the excellent platforms both now have on offer. Do this yesterday... Ford offer 4 door Mustang with new sheet metal and call it Cougar or whatever. Just make it look as good as the Charger with room for 4 adults. Chevy bring back the Chevelle. Hire a decent designer for the interior. Give it a real backseat. The main thing is keep them affordable. It would be nice to see both makers invest in actual interior design on the base models devoid of all of the cheap computer junk automakers keep pushing on the buying public. Give us real knobs switches and gauges. I know this is wishful thinking because it makes too much sense. Just my thoughts.

Yes, it's hard to beat the legendary M3 and M5, no matter how good the design and driving experience is. Now it's actually crossover/cute-utes with 500 hp that are the rage.

kudos to chevy for the efficiency of such a beast, truly amazing to hit 30mpg. The looks are evolving but are still inferior to the mustang. The mustang has the better sounding motor and ford has closed the gap in handling, but only because chevy didnt upgrade the camaro suspension while ford has been putting in shelby GT350 suspension bits. With the 1LE package, this car is an amazing car, but without that I might prefer the mustang as an all around car. No visibility is a big issue, and failing to fully pull out the handling chops of the ATS chassis in the SS version is also a detraction.

I bought in 2017 a new 2018 1SS 1LE and the car is f-ing good. I daily drive it too. My gripe is visibility, with this car you just can't see the floor, when going near a curb you have to anticipate it, because you just can not see it... it gets annoying. If there is an upside, since there is little glass, it does not get too hot... no glass house effect here.

I am already looking to trade it in for 2SS 1LE, for the improvements and before GM changes the front to the front of the SEMA that I don't like. I just wish the rear view mirror camera was standard across the lineup and the Vette's 7-speed manual was standard too.

I highly doubt there will be a 7th gen Camaro, sales have been abysmal, SUV trends and the great Al Oppenheiser leaving to GM's electric car sector. This may be the last of Camaro.

I think it was this very publication that did a story about why the Mustang's line is unbroken since 1964 and the 4th Gen Camaro was cancelled. It was due to a lack of everyday usability: low seating position, crappy interior, etc. Maybe the Mustang wasn't as powerful, but it was still useful as a "secretary's car". Fast forward 20 years, and we're back in the same boat.

Maybe GM has figured out how to be profitable in this very narrow niche that they've created (1st class dynamics for people who drive by braille), but it seems they're more of the didn't-learn-from-history-doomed-to-repeat-it types.

Are you crazy? The Mustang is gorgeous! Sleek and modern with just the right bulges and classy fastback proportions. It looks almost like a BMW but in a very American way.

I'd rate the Camaro (before the '19 redesign) a distant second, and the Challenger dead last. All Dodge did is copy an old car design, it's like a sappy cover song by a high school band, very weak effort and manipulative of public sentiments. The only positive thing I can say for the Dodge is that it looks just how it drives: fast in a straight line with a suspension that can't handle the speed if you need to turn. It's basically a bloated barge with a big engine.

opinions are like bung holes, so while .my DD is a '17 5.0; but I've got a '165 Z28 and an 09'09 Z06..either of which drive better and gets better mileage than my M6 5.0. My 17 M6 tranny is noisy while the TR6060 is quiet and composed. If I'm buying an SS it'd be the 21LE, but truth is I'll never do that as my Z/28's coolctibility was why I bought; and patience is the word, pricies will go up they only made 1897 o them.

It is so badly compromised... I've had students in HPDE events with these and while they are learning everything else they have to attempt to see out of this thing to keep track of the cars around them. It doesn't work. I'd rather not have students with these...
And it's too bad because it has a terrific chassis... but you can't see out of it.
If Chevrolet would only get away from the kiddy stuff styling and "attitude", away from taking a concept directly to production, they would have had the best car. But as it is, it's almost dangerous on track, and it's a lousy daily driver too.
Let's get on to the next generation... hopefully they will do better next time. It's only a few years off...

There won't be a next generation Camaro. Al Oppenheiser was reassigned to an administrative position in EV development that doesn't put him in charge of any individual vehicle, and the rest of the Camaro team has been disbanded.

From the "who could have predicted" file, the childish styling and poor visibility killed the Camaro.

There won't be a next generation Camaro. Al Oppenheiser was reassigned to an administrative position in EV development that doesn't put him in charge of any individual vehicle, and the rest of the Camaro team has been disbanded.

From the "who could have predicted" file, the childish styling and poor visibility killed the Camaro.

You do realize "the childish styling and poor visibility" was there in the 2010-2015 5th Gens, and was top seller?

There won't be a next generation Camaro. Al Oppenheiser was reassigned to an administrative position in EV development that doesn't put him in charge of any individual vehicle, and the rest of the Camaro team has been disbanded.

From the "who could have predicted" file, the childish styling and poor visibility killed the Camaro.

A sad story as they had the best engineering, best manual tranny, most efficient engine/hp in a performance car, but turded up the car with horrific outward visibility and cartoon styling. The engineers did their job, marketing and design flopped hugely.

When car shopping last year I test drove an automatic Mustang and test sat in a Camaro before I had to scramble out of it to avoid a panic attack (kinda not kidding). The Mustang's tranny was too bipolar for me, rushing to a high gear then downshifting to maintain steady acceleration like an ol' slim jim, then gettin' all hyper in sport mode. The manuals are apparently having issues.

There's certainly nothing wrong with retro styling....if you actually do retro styling. A '68 Camaro is a virtual Camry sedan compared to the gen 6 Camaro. If GM would get rid of the stupid (visibility, gargantuan gauge hood, rear package tray that looks intentionally designed to block your view) I would probably buy one, because apparently its got the goods where it counts.

Hey if you have to drive long HWY miles, this is the way to sell it to the wife.....30 MPG at 75 MPH!.....versus 24 MPG for the slightly quicker Stang GT....That's 25% better 'fuel efficiency' for an old-timer 6.2 L, 376 cu in PUSHROD engine over the newer multi-valver.
"Honey why did you fill up the tank twice last week? Are you nailing the throttle again?"

GM has really engineered the best mass produced V8 engines in the world. The German biturbo V8s are impressive and I'd love to drive one, but I'd never want to own one and pay to repair it. GM's V8s on the other hand, they're fairly reliable, cheap to repair, and have more than enough power for the street and the track.

It's a shame GM doesn't offer the LT1 in more of their products as the top engine choice.

GM has really engineered the best mass produced V8 engines in the world. The German biturbo V8s are impressive and I'd love to drive one, but I'd never want to own one and pay to repair it. GM's V8s on the other hand, they're fairly reliable, cheap to repair, and have more than enough power for the street and the track.

It's a shame GM doesn't offer the LT1 in more of their products as the top engine choice.

longevity of cylinder shutdown motors like this camaro engine are not yet established. Initially they were problematic in oil consumption and those motors didn't last. The non shutdown V8 engines from GM have been proven for the long term but they are far less efficient on the highway. This car runs 4 cylinders at 3.lL and a 10 speed auto to get that mileage. In another 5 years some more of these engines will be 150k with normal usage(not 90% highway), and we will see how they have held up. Lots of modern tech is like that, even the direct injection has had carbon buildup issues that limit engine life. Ford does go with direct plus port injection in the newer mustangs which apparently doesn't suffer from the carbon buildup. But these cars are technically complicated, new technology iteration has been so fast chasing CAFE that it hardly gets the time to get the bugs out before its abandoned. And the trannys may not last either, as they are all new.

longevity of cylinder shutdown motors like this camaro engine are not yet established. Initially they were problematic in oil consumption and those motors didn't last. The non shutdown V8 engines from GM have been proven for the long term but they are far less efficient on the highway. This car runs 4 cylinders at 3.lL and a 10 speed auto to get that mileage. In another 5 years some more of these engines will be 150k with normal usage(not 90% highway), and we will see how they have held up. Lots of modern tech is like that, even the direct injection has had carbon buildup issues that limit engine life. Ford does go with direct plus port injection in the newer mustangs which apparently doesn't suffer from the carbon buildup. But these cars are technically complicated, new technology iteration has been so fast chasing CAFE that it hardly gets the time to get the bugs out before its abandoned. And the trannys may not last either, as they are all new.

The LT1 has been in service since 2014 on the C7 'Vette and it holds up well. Carbon buildup does necessitate cleaning for those who want peak efficiency and performance, so that is some extra maintenance. So far I think only Ford and Toyota have added port injection to GDI to keep valves clean, and I hope GM's LT1 successor uses it too.

The cylinder deactivation tech that had issues was a very old version, I think from the 70s, yes? It's not comparable at all to GM's current deactivation tech, which closes the valves in order to maintain cylinder pressure and keep the rings sealed.

longevity of cylinder shutdown motors like this camaro engine are not yet established. Initially they were problematic in oil consumption and those motors didn't last. The non shutdown V8 engines from GM have been proven for the long term but they are far less efficient on the highway. This car runs 4 cylinders at 3.lL and a 10 speed auto to get that mileage. In another 5 years some more of these engines will be 150k with normal usage(not 90% highway), and we will see how they have held up. Lots of modern tech is like that, even the direct injection has had carbon buildup issues that limit engine life. Ford does go with direct plus port injection in the newer mustangs which apparently doesn't suffer from the carbon buildup. But these cars are technically complicated, new technology iteration has been so fast chasing CAFE that it hardly gets the time to get the bugs out before its abandoned. And the trannys may not last either, as they are all new.

I hate cylinder shutdown motors. it simply is not worth the 1 or 2 MPG it gives you. The whole point of a big V8 is instant power. I bought a 06 Charger SRT8 in the fall of 05. I put 263,000 miles on that engine with lots of racing with never a problem. Not sure if this motor can do that. The least Chevy small block I had, 95 Impala SS, also ran over 250K with no problems.

I find it interesting ,to put it charitably, that Chevy doesn't offer a performance axle ratio option here, unlike Ford ,which does with the 5.0 Mustang, in both Auto and Manual transmission models. Even allowing for the small discrepancy in tire diameters, and the greater torque output of the LT1 vs the Coyote 5.0, I'm curious how this car would accelerate/compete with perhaps an optional 10- 30% increased numerical ratio, and how much fuel economy would be affected in the real world, or EPA testing by such an option?

While I enjoyed reading this otherwise well -written article, unless I missed something, the axle ratio is not mentioned, which I find is often the case , and the axle ratio is conspicuous in its absence from the test results.

Per the OEM websites:

2019 Camaro SS auto:

2.77:1 , no options

2019 Mustang 5.0 auto :

3.15:1 standard

3.55:1 optional

In summary, I'm concerned that this is indicative of GM not putting the effort into this car, vs Ford's efforts into the Mustang, at least in this area.

No offense, but Camaro's body is designed for simple minded or H.S. kids. No sophistication and I can't see any highly educated professionals driving one. It would be so easy to reshape the body and fix dash to appeal to wider audience. I would personally like to have one because of its engines and performance. Well, at least they have their fans happy and ready to rumble! How about an "elegant" (read Aston Martin or Jaguar F) style version for the rest of us?... I would prefer to drive American car. Corvette maybe? - I am already tired of chiseled, with huge toy-like ass Corvette's body. The best thing they did is fix that roof that now is executed in a very good taste. Front is not bad either, but please, change the electrical door latch to mechanical.

These comments are dead ringers from those who have never driven one. It's obvious b/c if you did, you'd never write such BS.

I'm highly educated and definitely a car guy and have a '19 Camaro 1SS A10. I work from home so I don't commute in it. But after work activities and weekends it gets driven.

And I can tell you whole heartedly, you will NEVER find a car as good as this for anywhere CLOSE to the money. My SS is an absolute joyful beast to own/drive. The automatic is sensational. This car is tight and refined. It is not brutish or crude by any means. It's totally comfortable. It handles like it's on rails and that engine is just nasty.

Apple Car play is standard on a decent sized screen and the air vent design is super cool.

All the babies on this site that complain about the interior should just go buy an Audi and pay countless thousands more so their manboobs can be more pampered. For the non-prissies, the interior is MORE than nice enough.

The visibility while not great is so insanely overblown. I can see fine out if and have never found the view out to be a hindrance at all. Maybe in slow parking lots a right curb can be hard to see but you get used to it and I've had no problems. I don't even think about the visibility when I drive it.

The car looks totally badass. I got $7K off MSRP with rebates and discounts. For $33K, this is car is mind bogglingly good. I'd feel the same if I spent $50K on it. Anyone who plunks down their $ on a Camaro SS and isn't thrilled, needs to have their pulse checked and head examined.

Black covers imperfections of the shape, so it doesn't look too bad. Of course its a super car for the money, but some small improvements would open up more marketing possibilities. The body design Is just not good enoughf for me...

For track driving is fine, but I want more refine styling, that's all.